Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost

Old 25th Mar 2014, 12:02
  #8001 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 483
could it be engine wound down no gennies, rat came on then satcom tried to fire up
This was my exact suggestion few posts before:

or was it effect of low power on fuel exhaustion?

This could be a good indicator, that 0019utc (08:10) was the exact time of the final power failure.
Is the Inmarsat comms device on RAT at all?
Ptkay is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 12:18
  #8002 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: UTC-14
Posts: 21
Inmarsat

Quote:
MAS no satellite contract...
The inmarsat information with logon/logoff probes pretty well confirms that MAS was an active customer. No network provider would be probing non-customers in this way.

I had picked up the no sat contract from a very early post, but this clearly was wrong.
UnreliableSource is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 12:19
  #8003 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 32
Inmarsat Calculations

Some more information on the Inmarsat calculations:





Source
flt001 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 12:24
  #8004 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 13
@A69 thanks for posting the AAIB report and charts. Assuming the blue dots on the “Measured Data” chart are actual points of measurement for the burst frequency offset analysis (as implied), the satellite and aircraft would appear to have communicated more often than had previously been thought – i.e. at (roughly) the following times:

0042L
0055L
0107L

0225L
0227L
0228L

0340L
0440L
0540L
0640L
0811L
0819L (partial)

It would be interesting to know what prompted the comms between 0225L and 0230L.
volcanicash is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 12:30
  #8005 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Flyin' low and feeling mean
Posts: 185
MAS no satellite contract therefore by your own statement the switching vhf to data would disconnect ACARS - agreed?
No I don't agree. From various news sources (Google MAS satellite contract) MAS didn't have the contract to continuously transmit its position and other continuous data (ala AF447) via ACARS satellite data (in order to save about 10usd/flt), but they retained the the ability to transmit data via satellite on a request basis. For example to request weather or contact ops in an emergency, or when using CPDLC. Without the satellite connection the aircraft wouldn't be able to use CPDLC when outside of VHF range, and I know they were able to do that.

To turn off the ACARS data transmission you have to go into the com's page on center console, and perform the four step process to actually turn it off. Simply moving the VHF 3 radio head out of the data mode won't do it.
Hogger60 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 12:43
  #8006 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 76
Posts: 316
Originally Posted by UnreliableSource View Post
The inmarsat information with logon/logoff probes pretty well confirms that MAS was an active customer. No network provider would be probing non-customers in this way.

I had picked up the no sat contract from a very early post, but this clearly was wrong.
no sat contract FOR Acars. not no sat contract, even if transmitted by aircraft not accepted by satellite
oldoberon is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 13:24
  #8007 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Dubai
Posts: 91
"BBC are reporting a final partial Inmarsat handshake ping received at 08:19 following the routine handshake received at 08:11 with no explanation".

Flame out.
RAT deployed.
SATCOM Packs ( are ON/RUN) provides the last (new) "handshake".

IF the report is actually correct.
JamesGV is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 13:32
  #8008 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: germany
Posts: 31
We`ve heard,that the Pilot was separated from his wife,but still living under the same roof.
Do we know, who was the force behind this separation ?
Maybe it was his wife and the pilot still hoped to reconcile.Wč`ve heard she left him just the day before that flight.If, and it is of course a big "if"this affected him really strongly it could have triggered a suicide situation.
philip2412 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 13:33
  #8009 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Dubai
Posts: 91
Yep. Simultaneously powers Electrics and Hydraulics.
JamesGV is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 13:34
  #8010 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,593
Uplinker, IMHO the best visual search platform is already there - the Chinese IL76.

It has a fast transit speed, good slow speed performance, and what it lacks in electronic equipment is more than compensated by an incomparable lookout capability.
Pontius Navigator is online now  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 13:36
  #8011 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Dubai
Posts: 91
Forgot.

Unsatisfactory RPM, then the load is shed with priority to Hydraulics.
JamesGV is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 13:48
  #8012 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Denmark
Age: 59
Posts: 64
Shifting responsibility?

Now that the crash site has (almost) been located inside Melbourne FIR, will the formal responsibility for the investigation be transferred to Australia?
PA28Viking is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 13:49
  #8013 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Toronto
Posts: 7
Originally Posted by JamesGV View Post
"BBC are reporting a final partial Inmarsat handshake ping received at 08:19 following the routine handshake received at 08:11 with no explanation".

Flame out.
RAT deployed.
SATCOM Packs ( are ON/RUN) provides the last (new) "handshake".

IF the report is actually correct.
Does the RAT power SATCOM? For classic Aero it is quite a powerful transmitter, it is not used as a critical flight system, it seems like a waste of RAT power.

My theory is that a momentary loss of power to the SATCOM modem caused it to attempt to re-establish a connection with INMARSAT, which it was not powered for long enough to complete.
nupogodi is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 13:52
  #8014 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Trinidad
Age: 58
Posts: 23
aircraft to ship communication

Since this unfortunate incident, it occurred to me that if required to ditch in the open ocean I should easily be able to contact nearby ships, since then I decided to test the standard HF maritime emergency frequencies and have made continuous attempts to contact ocean going vessels as I fly directly over them in the Atlantic. I have tried several HF frequencies regarded as maritime emergency frequencies over the last 2 weeks without success. It would appear there is no set frequency that is "religiously" monitored as 121.5 on aircraft. Maybe this is something that needs some extra thought as a commercial airliner in distress should quickly and easily be able to communicate with ocean going vessels. it would be a shame to ditch alongside a vessel at night and watch it continue to steam off into the distance. 2182 kHz, 4125 kHz, 8291khz, 16590khz, 12290khz. Any advice?
dingy737 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 13:55
  #8015 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 594
Wč`ve heard she left him just the day before that flight.
No, she moved out of the family home the day before the flight. As you say, they were already separated.
Speed of Sound is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 14:01
  #8016 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: With the fairies!
Posts: 30
Most merchant ships ceased to carry radio officers and now have automated communications including email etc. HF is seldom used nowadays.

You would be much more likely to contact ships using the VHF frequency of 156.800 which is commonly known as Channel 16. This maritime radio equipment is not carried in any commercial aircraft I have flown but is fitted to some Naval helicopters and maritime patrol aircraft.
Red Plum is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 14:03
  #8017 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: US
Posts: 7
distress call

Many posts ago, there was an unsubstantiated report that a US naval base in Thailand (Utapuo?) received a distress call with language like "cabin disintegrating".
What ever happened to this story?
Was it shown to be a hoax?
KTVaughan is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 14:04
  #8018 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Oxford, England
Posts: 297
Lapp, #8026:

Wrong attribution - it might help if you could actually verify who said what before posting :-).

My original post was in reply to James890 as follows, #7968:

James890:

Data remanence on CVR?

If they were still using magnetic tape, then there may be a chance to recover earlier recordings, much as overwritten hard drive data can sometimes be recovered if you have a right tools.

However, I would expect that modern cvr systems would record to flash or battery backed up memory. ie: digital rather than analog recording. Earlier contents would be overwritten in a continuous loop from the start of memory once end of memory is reached. There would be no way to recover data that has been overwritten...

To which CommanderCYYZ said in #7987 :

@syseng68k
It's actually much easier to recover data from over-written digital media. FBI software can recover data from digital media that has been over-written multiple times, or reformatted repeatedly.

Clearer now ?…
syseng68k is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 14:15
  #8019 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: directly below the zenith
Posts: 45
Originally Posted by PA28Viking View Post
Now that the crash site has (almost) been located inside Melbourne FIR, will the formal responsibility for the investigation be transferred to Australia?
Australian PM told parliament today: "SAR has now moved to a recovery and investigation operation and that responsibility for the investigation would now be handed back to Malaysia, as it is legally responsible under the Chicago Convention"
deadheader is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2014, 14:21
  #8020 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: ex Ice Station Kilo
Age: 61
Posts: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by dingy737 View Post
Since this unfortunate incident, it occurred to me that if required to ditch in the open ocean I should easily be able to contact nearby ships, since then I decided to test the standard HF maritime emergency frequencies and have made continuous attempts to contact ocean going vessels as I fly directly over them in the Atlantic. I have tried several HF frequencies regarded as maritime emergency frequencies over the last 2 weeks without success. It would appear there is no set frequency that is "religiously" monitored as 121.5 on aircraft. Maybe this is something that needs some extra thought as a commercial airliner in distress should quickly and easily be able to communicate with ocean going vessels. it would be a shame to ditch alongside a vessel at night and watch it continue to steam off into the distance. 2182 kHz, 4125 kHz, 8291khz, 16590khz, 12290khz. Any advice?
Red Plum
Most merchant ships ceased to carry radio officers and now have automated communications including email etc. HF is seldom used nowadays.

You would be much more likely to contact ships using the VHF frequency of 156.800 which is commonly known as Channel 16. This is not carried in any commercial aircraft I have flown but is fitted to some Naval helicopters and maritime patrol aircraft.
Nice thinking but Red Plum is correct. As a former Nimrod crew member, I'd say you would also need the name of the vessel to address it. Anyone listening to Marine Channel 16 would be unlikely to respond to a call of a general nature without being addressed. Hopefully a Mayday would elicit a response, although again, without Channel 16 availability, you'll never know.

We used Channel 16 regularly on SAROPS, and always (in my experience) to good effect. With three low level passes of a vessel allowed us by international law, we had a fighting chance of seeing the vessel's name. We could then make the final pass across the bows to grab the attention of whoever was on the bridge as we called the vessel!

In Civvy Street, "Tool this is hawk" is only likely to yield a WTF, a shrug and possibly a chortle.
Dai_Farr is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.